2013/7/4 Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> > > > The problem is with method overloading: In DS there is a defined algorithm > to find the named method in case of method overloading. In this case we > want to explicitly name a method. So we would have to define the actual > method signature in the property, which would be cumbersome when not using > the tooling. > > Yes, that's right - but I doubt that anyone is using AdapterProvider without the tooling - right now I don't see any advandate of doing runtime annotation checking, but the problem that things go wrong (interface implemented but no method annotation, method annotation but not AdapterProvider service). And having a marker interface for annotation scanning looks a little bit ugly as well - if we do runtime scanning, we could scan classes for the annotations like this is usually done with runtime scanning for annotations. But of course this would come with a high cost. So the current approach looks like a wrong compromise to me.
Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler [email protected]
